Thursday, May 1, 2014

Friday, October 18, 2013

Monday, September 9, 2013

I voted for Barack because he was the right man for President. And I have Obama's back on Syria.

Where is the outrage? This recent use of the known Syrian stockpiles of sarin/mustard (or whatever) gas is just the last straw. It demands, at long last, some kind of international reaction to syrian crimes against humanity.

Remember the Wars of Yugoslavian Dissolution? In the 1990's, after interminal agonizing and hand wringing, the USA bombed Serbian army to smithereens. That eventually resulted in regime change and alone enabled the eventual arrest and prosecution of Slobodan Miloševic. Bosnia and Kosova are today far from perfect. But the flood of refugees was interrupted before it de-stabilized surrounding states. No American boots were on the ground and no American blood was lost.

Now Syria: 80,033 have been killed to keep this killer & and his family in power. The 2 million refugees that the U.N. now documents, which includes more than 1 million children, is placing a huge strain on the countries hosting them. At the end of August, some 716,000 Syrian refugees were registered or in the process of being registered in Lebanon, 515,000 in Jordan, 460,000 in Turkey, 168,000 in Iraq and 110,000 in Egypt. This is ethnic cleansing at its worse.

General Wesley Clark, who led the NATO campaign against Serbia forces in Kosova also has Obama's back:

But President Obama has rightly drawn a line at the use of chemical weapons. Some weapons are simply too inhuman to be used. And, as many of us learned during 1990s, in the words of President Clinton, "Where we can make a difference, we must act."

Interestingly, General Clark also points out:

As in the case of Syria today, there was no United Nations resolution explicitly authorizing NATO to bomb Serbia. But NATO nations found other ways, including an earlier U.N. Security Council Resolutionpage 105, to legally justify what had to be done. In Syria, the violation of the 1925 Geneva prohibition against the use of chemical weapons is probably sufficient justification. (The fact that Russia used chemical weapons in Afghanistan in the 1980s should be used to undercut Russian objections to strikes against Syria today.)

I opposed the war in Vietnam, and the invasion of Iraq. In the streets. But I am in favor of killing or ousting this hereditary dictator in Damascus by any means short of putting American boots on the ground. Drones, missiles, bombs. He's propped up by the Russians, Iranians, and Hezbollah. Bashar al-Assad is, at the moment, the world's bloodiest terrorist. Some people just need killing. If he can be disappeared, the Syrians can sort Al-Qaeda out w/o our assistance.

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

More than 30 people were killed in gun battles between Iraqi forces and militants on Wednesday, a day after a raid on a Sunni protest ignited the fiercest clashes since American troops left the country.

The second day of fighting threatens to deepen sectarian rifts in Iraq where relations between Shia and Sunni Muslims are still very tense just a few years after inter-communal slaughter pushed the country close to civil war.

The clashes between gunmen and troops were the bloodiest since thousands of Sunni Muslims started protests in December to demand an end to what they see as marginalisation of their sect by Shia Prime Minister Nuri Al Maliki.

On Tuesday, troops stormed one of the Sunni protest camps and more than 50 people were killed in the ensuing clashes which spread beyond the town of Hawija near Kirkuk, 170 km (100 miles) north of Baghdad, to other areas.

Sporadic battles continued on Wednesday and hardline tribal leaders warned that protests could turn into open revolt against the Baghdad government even as Sunni moderates and foreign diplomats called for restraint.

Militants briefly took over a police station and an army base and burned a small Shia mosque in Sulaiman Pek, 160 km (100 miles) north of Baghdad, before army helicopters drove gunmen out of the town.

At least 18 were killed, including 10 gunmen and five soldiers, officials said.

An ambush on an army convoy near Tikrit with roadside bombs and rocket-propelled grenades killed three more soldiers. Three more troops were killed in an attack in Diyala province.

Later on Wednesday, clashes erupted in the northern city of Mosul, where gunmen launched an attack after using a mosque loudspeaker to call Sunnis to join their fight. At least three police and four soldiers died in the assault, officials said.

In a separate attack, at least eight people were also killed and 23 more wounded when a car bomb exploded in eastern Baghdad, police and medical sources said.

A surge in Sunni militant unrest has accompanied growing turmoil among the Shia , Sunni and Kurdish parties that make up Maliki’s power-sharing government.

A decade after the U.S.-led invasion, sectarian wounds are still raw in Iraq, where just a few a years ago violence between Shia militias and Sunni insurgents killed tens of thousands of people.

Sectarian bloodshed reached its height in Iraq in 2006-2007 after Al Qaeda bombed the Shia Askari shrine in Samarra, triggering a cycle of retaliation.

Thousands of Sunnis have been protesting since December, venting frustrations building up since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the empowerment of Iraq’s Shia majority through the ballot box.

‘We are staying restrained so far, but if government forces keep targeting us, no one can know what will happen in the future, and things could spin out of control,’ said Abdul Aziz Al Faris, a Sunni tribal leader in Hawija.

The two main Shia militias, Asaib Al Haq and Kataeb Hizbullah, appear to have stayed out of the latest violence. But former fighters said they could take up arms again if needed.

Maliki has set up a committee headed by a senior Sunni leader to investigate the violence at the Hawija camp, which left 23 people dead. He has promised to punish any excessive use of force and provide for victims’ families.

The prime minister has offered some concessions to Sunni protesters, including proposed reforms to tough anti-terrorism laws, but most Sunni leaders say they will not be enough to appease the demonstrators.

The Shia premier may also seek to consolidate his position before 2014 parliamentary elections by taking a tough stance against hardline Sunni.

That may be a risk which could further alienate Sunnis.

‘What we are now likely to see in western Iraq is a deteriorating cycle of confrontation between the central government and protesters that will benefit extremist groups,’ said Crispin Hawes at Eurasia Group.

Iraq’s Sunni community is deeply divided between moderates more keen to work within Maliki’s government and those who see resistance as the only way to confront Baghdad.

‘The Maliki government’s aggression against our people in Hawija has forced us to take our uprising on another course,’ said Shaikh Qusai Al Zain, a protest leader in Anbar province.

‘We call upon all tribes and armed groups to begin supporting our brothers in Hawija.’

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

H.L. Mencken on Radicalism

The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naive and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who loves his country more than the rest of us, and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair.

Reverend G R Gleig, survived the First Anglo-Afghan War to write in 1843:

...a war begun for no wise purpose, carried on with a strange mixture of rashness and timidity, brought to a close after suffering and disaster, without much glory attached either to the government which directed, or the great body of troops which waged it. Not one benefit, political or military, has Britain acquired with this war. Our eventual evacuation of the country resembled the retreat of an army defeated.